1,705
Views
78
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
REGULAR ARTICLES

Brightness differences influence the evaluation of affective pictures

, , , &
Pages 1225-1246 | Received 19 Nov 2012, Accepted 26 Feb 2013, Published online: 03 May 2013
 

Abstract

We explored the possibility of a general brightness bias: brighter pictures are evaluated more positively, while darker pictures are evaluated more negatively. In Study 1 we found that positive pictures are brighter than negative pictures in two affective picture databases (the IAPS and the GAPED). Study 2 revealed that because researchers select affective pictures on the extremity of their affective rating without controlling for brightness differences, pictures used in positive conditions of experiments were on average brighter than those used in negative conditions. Going beyond correlational support for our hypothesis, Studies 3 and 4 showed that brighter versions of neutral pictures were evaluated more positively than darker versions of the same picture. Study 5 revealed that people categorised positive words more quickly than negative words after a bright picture prime, and vice versa for negative pictures. Together, these studies provide strong support for the hypotheses that picture brightness influences evaluations.

We thank Dik Hermes for valuable assistance with MATLAB programming.

We thank Dik Hermes for valuable assistance with MATLAB programming.

Notes

1 Note that several IAPS pictures have two sets of ratings in the 2008 Tech manual for pictures that were included in two separate rating studies: 1230, 1590, 1610, 1640, 1670, 2210, 3000, 3010, 4220, 4520, 6200, 9090. The first reported set of ratings was used in the current analysis, but both ratings yielded identical results.

2 One study used only nine exceptionally bright positive pictures, one study used only two exceptionally bright neutral pictures, and one study used only two exceptionally bright negative pictures.

3 Note that the interaction was also significant without removing outliers, F(1, 77)=5.39, p=.023, , or when using an a priori determined cutoff value of 1,000 ms (cf. Gawronski, Deutsch, & Seidel, Citation2005), F(1, 77)=25.76, p<.001, .

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 503.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.